-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi,
hanne...@gmx.at wrote: > if osg wants to address the game market it needs to have advantages and > these have to be communicated. Hannes, I do not see anyone saying that the goal of OSG is to be a game engine :( I think that is the main problem with your arguments. OSG *can* be used within a game engine (e.g. Delta3D), but it is not its main target. Furthermore, game engines are a much more than a scenegraph (which is what OSG is). It would be a very hard sell to convince someone like Valve that they have to abandon all their DirectX-centric content production pipeline just to use OSG. There is ton of other middleware these companies use that is developed to work with DirectX and would have to be either adapted or replaced with OpenGL enabled versions (SpeedTree, Havoc ...) Then add the issues of driver support and all that and unless you are developing the game for both Mac and Windows that will need to be actively supported for 4-5 years at least, OpenGL is simply a no-starter there economically. It could be a more viable option for starting studios which do not have an entrenched pipeline yet, but then we are not talking Valve or EA anymore .. Regards, Jan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mandriva - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJz2w9n11XseNj94gRAn9KAKDXo/EMlmhz51T5OL4ldovfO0W/IgCgyL7G 8x53XmzIR8/uiKLNusF3vnY= =Wxzx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
